326
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2026
326 points (99.4% liked)
Programming
28262 readers
144 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The part that irkes me most about this, is he's right.
The complaint is valid, non-breaking production changes should be the norm, not the expected, 100%. And yes, I maintain upstream work, too.
Doesn't forgive them being a dick. Permaban in my book, I just hate that he's right.
Are they right though? Not every project follows semver, it's on consumers to pay attention. Especially if it's a recurring problem: this problem (assuming the project follows semver) hould happen once at most.
Right or wrong in versioning is always a debate, but for me, breaking changes on non-major versions is not. I run a number of projects, and it's the one thing I avoid at all costs.
The last thing a container user wants is a difficult update, it's the reason we end up with outdated vulnerable software floating around. And it only takes getting bitten by it once to always be weary of a future update.